I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al

Filing 1029

MOTION to Seal I/P Engine's Supplemental Memorandum Setting Forth Additional Facts Justifying Its Request for Default Judgment in I/P Engine's Motion for Defendants to Show Cause Under Rule 37 for Non-Compliance with the August 13, 2013 Order and the Declaration of Charles J. Monterio, Jr. in Support of I/P Engine's Supplemental Memorandum of Additional Facts by I/P Engine, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sherwood, Jeffrey)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
NORFOLK DIVISION
__________________________________________
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
)
AOL, INC. et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
I/P ENGINE, INC.,

Civ. Action No. 2:11-cv-512

MOTION TO SEAL I/P ENGINE’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM SETTING
FORTH ADDITIONAL NEW FACTS JUSTIFYING ITS REQUEST FOR DEFAULT
JUDGMENT IN I/P ENGINE’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANTS TO SHOW CAUSE
UNDER RULE 37 FOR NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE AUGUST 13, 2013 ORDER
AND THE DECLARATION OF CHARLES J. MONTERIO, JR. IN SUPPORT OF I/P
ENGINE’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF ADDITIONAL FACTS
Pursuant to Local Rule 5 and the Agreed Protective Order entered by the Court [Dkt. No.
85], Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc. (“I/P Engine”) respectfully moves this Court for entry of the
attached Order permitting Plaintiff to file under seal its Supplemental Memorandum Setting
Forth Additional New Facts Justifying Its Request For Default Judgment In I/P Engine’s Motion
For Defendants To Show Cause Under Rule 37 For Noncompliance with the August 13, 2013
Order and the Declaration of Charles J. Monterio, Jr. in Support of I/P Engine’s Supplemental
Memorandum of Additional Facts (collectively, “Supplemental Memorandum”). Grounds and
authorities for this Motion are set forth in I/P Engine’s Memorandum in Support of Motion to
Seal. In compliance with Local Rule 5, I/P Engine attaches a Proposed Agreed Order as Exhibit
1 and is filing separately a Public Notice of I/P Engine’s Motion to Seal. I/P Engine requests
that the Court retain sealed materials until forty-five (45) days after a final order is entered and

DSMDB-3202983

request that, unless the case is appealed, any sealed materials be returned to counsel for the filing
parties. The parties have agreed that confidential materials should be filed under seal.

Dated: October 31, 2013

By: /s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood
Donald C. Schultz (Virginia Bar No. 30531)
W. Ryan Snow (Virginia Bar No. 47423)
CRENSHAW, WARE & MARTIN PLC
150 West Main Street
Norfolk, VA 23510
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Jeffrey K. Sherwood (Virginia Bar No. 19222)
Frank C. Cimino, Jr.
Kenneth W. Brothers
Charles J. Monterio, Jr.
DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP
1825 Eye Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Counsel for Plaintiff I/P Engine, Inc.

2
DSMDB-3202983

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 31st day of October, 2013, the foregoing was served
via the Court’s CM/ECF system, on the following:
Stephen Edward Noona
Kaufman & Canoles, P.C.
150 W Main St
Suite 2100
Norfolk, VA 23510
[e-mail]
David Bilsker
David Perlson
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
50 California Street, 22nd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Robert L. Burns
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Two Freedom Square
11955 Freedom Drive
Reston, VA 20190
[e-mail]
Cortney S. Alexander
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
3500 SunTrust Plaza
303 Peachtree Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 94111
[e-mail]
/s/ Jeffrey K. Sherwood

3
DSMDB-3202983